johnodon Posted July 24, 2016 Share Posted July 24, 2016 EDIT: I'll grab a syslog after the check is completed and I start the array again. I totally forgot to get it before I jumped. I was seeing a LOT of messages in my syslog telling me that XFS on disk5 had corruption. So, I stopped the array and restarted it in maintenance mode. I then clicked on disk5 and told it to run an xfs_repair -n which it is doing now. I'll let the check run until it is finished but the first thing that popped up was this message: Phase 1 - find and verify superblock... couldn't verify primary superblock - not enough secondary superblocks with matching geometry !!! attempting to find secondary superblock... Does this indicate that I am heading for dark times? FYI...one of the symptoms I am seeing is missing media (i.e. TV show episodes) and some of my shares show as empty even though I can see files/folders in them when I look at individual disks. Advice??? TIA! John John Quote Link to comment
TechDaddy Posted July 25, 2016 Share Posted July 25, 2016 While i have not been getting this exact error, I'm seeing quite a bit of "Silent corruption" that I monitor with a checksum addon. Just wait for it to finish and it will create a Lost+Found folder. I'm actually in the process of changing over to BTRFS, though ZFS would of been a nice addition. Quote Link to comment
johnodon Posted July 25, 2016 Author Share Posted July 25, 2016 XFS repair finished and came back with this... ..Sorry, could not find valid secondary superblock Exiting now. According to the help I can run it with a -L switch as a last resort. Will that even help in this case? Or is my only option to format the drive as RFS and back to XFS? John Quote Link to comment
trurl Posted July 25, 2016 Share Posted July 25, 2016 While i have not been getting this exact error, I'm seeing quite a bit of "Silent corruption" that I monitor with a checksum addon. Just wait for it to finish and it will create a Lost+Found folder. I'm actually in the process of changing over to BTRFS, though ZFS would of been a nice addition. Sounds like you must be doing something wrong somewhere. "Silent corruption" is definitely not typical. Also, checksums wouldn't help with filesystem corruption anyway, since it is not the file contents that are bad, but instead the filesystem metadata that tells how the file is stored. Quote Link to comment
johnodon Posted July 25, 2016 Author Share Posted July 25, 2016 I upgraded to v6.2 rc2 in hopes that the new version of xfs_repair will help me (v4.3 vs. v3.2.2 on 6.19). It's running now but I don't have high hopes. Quote Link to comment
johnodon Posted July 25, 2016 Author Share Posted July 25, 2016 While I am waiting for this xfs_repair to complete, let me ask this... Is an easy way to get the contents of my shares back to exclude disk5 from each? Will that do the trick? John Quote Link to comment
Azza666 Posted July 25, 2016 Share Posted July 25, 2016 I'm assuming if you remove the drive that unraid will emulate the drive contents. Get a replacement drive asap and then when you insert this you should be able to rebuild the array based on parity. I assumed this was the benefit of unraid. If anyone more knowledgable can pipe in please do so Cheers, David Quote Link to comment
trurl Posted July 25, 2016 Share Posted July 25, 2016 I'm assuming if you remove the drive that unraid will emulate the drive contents. Get a replacement drive asap and then when you insert this you should be able to rebuild the array based on parity. I assumed this was the benefit of unraid. If anyone more knowledgable can pipe in please do so Cheers, David If the drive has filesystem corruption, so does the emulated drive. Quote Link to comment
trurl Posted July 25, 2016 Share Posted July 25, 2016 While I am waiting for this xfs_repair to complete, let me ask this... Is an easy way to get the contents of my shares back to exclude disk5 from each? Will that do the trick? John Maybe excluding it in Global Share Settings would allow the user shares to access the contents of the user shares that are on other drives. Quote Link to comment
Azza666 Posted July 25, 2016 Share Posted July 25, 2016 I'm assuming if you remove the drive that unraid will emulate the drive contents. Get a replacement drive asap and then when you insert this you should be able to rebuild the array based on parity. I assumed this was the benefit of unraid. If anyone more knowledgable can pipe in please do so Cheers, David If the drive has filesystem corruption, so does the emulated drive. So if the emulated drive is stuffed does that mean that parity couldn't be used to rebuild the array onto a new drive? If this is the case then what is the point? Quote Link to comment
Squid Posted July 25, 2016 Share Posted July 25, 2016 Any parity system (unRaid, RAID1, RAID5, etc) is only used to recover dead disks. Something completely different such as SnapRaid could recover corrupt files under certain circumstances. It really depends upon how the corruption happened in the first place. If the parity system was updated to reflect the corruption, then a rebuild is going to have the same corruption on it. But, in the extremely unlikely case that the drive just plain went haywire and corrupted itself (without involving the OS itself), parity would not reflect the corruption, and in that case a rebuild would restore the files. Quote Link to comment
johnodon Posted July 25, 2016 Author Share Posted July 25, 2016 I decided to tuck my tail and just remove the problematic drive and create a new config. Running parity sync now. I think all that was at rick was tv shows and movies. Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.